31st October is going to be tight!

Deal wasn't on the ballot paper either. 17.5 million voted to Leave full stop.

Well, firecracker, Nigel Farage, three weeks before the referendum, said No Deal was remainer scaremongering and worst case scenario.

He seems to have changed his mind. But the electorate are not allowed to change their mind and have a second referendum!

It would be undemocratic to have another referendum when the first one has not been carried out.

Really firecracker?
What is your definition of democracy?

It would be undemocratic to have another referendum when the first one has not been carried out.

Not when the 'first' one (i.e June 2016) was undemocratic in that the result was corrupted by illegality and cheating. If you think that cheating doesn't matter so long as you win then that is an end to democracy in this country. So do stop twisting on about 'democracy'. It doesn't wash...

Are you aware that facebook has been given a $5billion fine for allowing Cambridge Analytica, the firm used by some Leave campaign to identify targets (i.e people) for dark advertising, to use illegally harvested facebook data? so all those lying adverts people saw on facebook about the evils of the EU and its future were placed there as a result of illegality.

Democratic votes are meant to be free and fair. Anything else subverts it.

Had the referendum been mandatory rather than advisory the result would have been declared void and it would have had to have been rerun.

Presumably you think we should vote once an never have another election. Donald Trump as President for ever?
Why do we bother to have general and local elections every few years then?
According to your theory, a second election of any sort would be undemocratic.
Part of democracy is the right to change your mind. And after more than three years of the Government failing to agree a Brexit strategy, perhaps we need a rethink?

Sorry that was to firecracker not you Maizie.

Mostlyharmless you are putting words into my mouth, of course we should have general elections (don't know what Trump in America has to do with anything) but that's entirely different to the once in a lifetime EU referendum which Leave won and David Cameron promised to stand by. Its undemocratic and morally wrong to have a second referendum when the first hasn't been implemented just because you don't like the original result.

"David Cameron promised to stand by the result".
And a damn fine job he made of that!
Changed his mind when faced with the consequences of his lunacy?

Actually what pissed me off about David Cameron he showed his leadership was only for Remainers, not the rest of us.

And he resigned, insouciantly whistling on his way out! The bounder.

Its undemocratic and morally wrong to have a second referendum when the first hasn't been implemented just because you don't like the original result.

You're ignoring the fact that the referendum was corrupted by illegality.

You don't give a monkey's, do you? Let democracy die; it really doesn't matter because your side 'won'.

No, I didn't like the original result but I liked it even less when I discovered how it was achieved.

lemongrove I haven't looked at this thread since my last post. However, I suggest you refresh your memory and look at your post on Friday at 19.59.55 in which you state "I, and most of the country who did vote leave..."
Have I misunderstood you?

Have just read your post today. If you had meant Leavers, then say Leavers. I and some of the others aren't mind readers.

I'm 100% sure if Grieve, Soubry, Cooper and all the other undemocratic remainer MPs could have proved the referendum illegal it would have been declared null and void by now they have tried every other trick in the book but they could not so the referendum result stands whether you like if or not.

I agree Firecracker but Remainers tell us it was ‘because it was advisory only’ that it cannot be challenged.

Seems very strange though that the outspoken Grieve et al aren’t complying vociferously about this very point.

No matter.

We’re leaving now.

Complaining (not complying).

I think it is entirely wrong to accuse those MPs, who do something you don't like in parliament of being "undemocratic" Firecracker. If they are abiding by parliaments rules the cannot be being undemocratic. What is happening is they disagree that what you want is best for the country so the are doing their job entirely democratically. It seems you do not understand representative democracy but that is what we have and describing people in the way that you have just drives the country apart. Which, of course is exactly what those who would attack our democracy wish for.

Well if it was so bad/wrong/disastrous for us to Leave why did they give us a vote on it?

The time for thwarting Brexit is passed.

The democratic dissenting MP’s have had 3 long years to let us all know their views but it’s now time to get this done and move on.

It will happen.

The time for thwarting Brexit is passed.

Yet again you, like so many who wish to leave the EU put forward an opinion as if it was a fact. A "no deal Brexit" is not a thing, it is the opposite of a thing. It is a negative position that pretends it is a deal. It is taking our wonderful country, so despised it seems by leavers that they want something, anything else, and moving it into thin air, with no certainties for business, the old the young, the right, the left or the middle.

It is so vague that its leading advocates claim it is democratic even though the majority of the electorate are against it. No, UG, now we are three years on and have gained knowledge about the reality we can see the fantasy of the leavers who tell us they don't want the EU, they want rid of other classes, other group, other nations - they don't want real relationships with all the hassle and imperfections they bring with them. They want to turn away from reality into the thin air of "no deal" - until we get it that is, and the reality strikes home.

The UK used to be famous for its compromises, and for making them work well. We could compromise round a reform programme, or a softer Europe. That's what, in my opinion, would be a British answer to a basically 50/50 split. So no UG I don't agree with your oh so negative abstract view of the future. The "time" is not yet passed for making other decisions.

I beg to differ. I don’t think leaving the E.U. is in any way a fantasy.

We will always be European. Just no longer part of the EU.

I expect great things going forward without the protectionist practices of the corrupt EU getting involved. We are a small but wealthy country. We have a (mostly) tolerant society - which is why immigrants love to come here as opposed to say, staying in France. People hide themselves in lorries to get here when they are perfectly safe in France!

Don't you just hate it when someone is intent on misinterpreting your post?

I did not say "leaving the EU" was a fantasy. All my post was actually about "no deal" and ended talking about possible compromises between the 48% and the 52% which could easily be, on any day of any particular week 52% and 48%.

Ah ... all that thinking time wasted.

But you misinterpret us too GracesGran when you somehow postulate that us Leavers despise our wonderful country

As if!

I agree Urmstom it was an astonishing and ridiculous claim for GGM2 to make.
High time to realise that all love our own country and want it to do well, which is true whichever way they voted.

Actually in my opinion it's Remainers who despise our country so much so that they want us to lose our identity and merge into the United States of Europe.

You may be an exception UG but I make it a point to read as much as I can coming from leavers, on other sites as well as this. I have seen a culture of the victim from the "if only" people. We hear if only we were out of the EU, we would be better off on our own. If only children were taught as we used to be taught and not for the future we would be better off. If only so many people did not go to university we would be better off. If only they didn't study subjects we didn't study we would be better off. If only MPs were just like us. If only MPs were just like the used to be we would be better off. If only our democracy were different, we would be better off. If only everyone was like me; if we got rid of the other classes we would be better off. If only we could get rid of other religions we would be better off. If only we could get rid of other nations we would be better off. And on and on.

So I would ask better off than what?

We have one of the most impressive democracies in the world. In many other countries, this 50/50 split would cause riots (welcomed by some leavers) and possibly civil war.

We have a fantastic judicial system with apparently incorruptible judges making incisive decisions.

We have an intelligent, lively, animated and certainly irreverent media.

We have some of the best civil servants, soldiers and noticeably diplomats who are prepared to work and give so much for the good of their country.

We are amazingly charitable and have a remarkable culture of voluntary activity.

Our diversity is greater, across the board than ever before.

Our economy is comparatively stable even in the times of international crisis.

Only the US can equal or surpass our universities

Only the US and China exceed us scientifically.

And yet the "victims" of our EU partnership cannot wait to throw away the vehicle that has helped us get to this point because the EU isn't "ours".

The "if onlies" get everywhere. And they sit there telling those of us who think of this country as great, while never satisfied that we can't do better, that we can be "great again" if only we throw everything away.

We would have those things you mention anyway ( and did have even before we joined the EU.)